USA V. JOHN APEL, No. 11-50003 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on April 25, 2012.
Download PDF
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 11-50003 v. D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00830JFW-1 JOHN DENNIS APEL, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 11-50004 v. D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00869JFW-1 JOHN DENNIS APEL, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 11-50005 v. D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00831JFW-1 JOHN DENNIS APEL, Defendant-Appellant. OPINION On Remand From The United States Supreme Court 2 UNITED STATES V. APEL Filed August 14, 2014 Before: Barry G. Silverman and Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Circuit Judges, and John R. Tunheim, District Judge.* Per Curiam Opinion COUNSEL Erwin Chemerinsky, Selwyn Chu (argued) and Matthew Plunkett (argued), law students, University of California, Irvine School of Law, for Defendant-Appellant. André Birotte Jr., United States Attorney, Robert E. Dugdale and Mark R. Yohalem (argued), Assistant United States Attorneys, Los Angeles, California, for Plaintiff-Appellee. OPINION PER CURIAM: On February 26, 2014, the United States Supreme Court vacated our opinion at 676 F.3d 1202 and remanded the case to us for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. United States v. Apel, __ U.S. __, 134 S.Ct. 1144 (2014). In light of the Supreme Court s decision, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. * The Honorable John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
